Oil subsidies and Asian diplomacy

Both Ferguson and the Nestlé chairman are walking a very fine line here.

How do we measure global market productivity against the capacity of people to power their boats to fish, or their trucks to carry on daily work, or to ensure their families have enough to eat? Where does the free market ethos break down when weighed up against the very means of daily survival for some of Asia's poorest workers?

In Australian, as in the rest of the world, the rising cost of petrol is a serious problem. To some it might mean real financial hardship. But in many Asian countries, the cost of fuel is actually a matter of daily survival.

Thai fishermen have said that they will burn their boats if the government doesn't help them meet their living costs. Malaysian taxi drivers have said they will have to stop work because with the recent price hike, they will be running their taxis at a loss - the more they drive, the more they lose.

The underlying imperative to find new ways to reduce global fuel consumption is an urgent one, and it is good that the Australian government is seeking to look for those urgent solutions.

But to take the position that Asian countries have to halt their subsidies, subsidies designed to alleviate the hardship of some of our regions poorest, is a dangerous position that leaves the door open for Australia to be accused of reckless meddling in the affairs of sovereign states.

Instead, Australia needs to set the lead in the shift to more sustainable transportation and energy generation that we can then export to Asia, thus providing real long term energy alternatives to our region, while simultaneously promoting economic growth in Australia in renewable energy industries.